Is there a real campaign in Chancellorsville

Hairog

adfads
Joined
May 16, 2006
Messages
54
Reaction score
1
Location
Wisconsin
Country
llUnited States
Is there a real campaign hiding somewhere in this title that I have yet to discover? I was expecting a real campaign with strategic choices like Gettysburg.

Am I missing something? So far I have not run into any choices just a bunch of scenarios stuck together with no choices on a grand scale like Gettys.

I'm not happy with this purchase so far. :cry:
 

rebel15nc

Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Messages
41
Reaction score
0
Location
NORTH CAROLINA
Country
llUnited States
I have not yet done anything with this game except look it over. My memory tells me that it does not have much of a campaign option. In fact, the two major battles included (Fredericksburg and Chancellorsville) are really pretty unrelated in time. There was 6 months between the battles not to mention winter quarters for the troops. I would suggest that Chancellorsville should really begin the Gettsyburg Campaign. Gettysburg was really a continuation of the campaign that began with Chancellorsville. The losses from Chancellorsville should properly be reflected in the armies that start north to Gettysburg about 30 days later. Don't get me wrong. I appreciate the effort that went into this game and I am happy to have both battles to fight out. But, this disk (probably because the battles are not really tied together in real life) does not have too much in common with the previous Campaign type options on the previous disks.
On a related matter, I am still hoping for a scenario for Chancellorsville that will let you refight the whole battle from day one ie. see the entire map and have the option to use the Union 6th Corps as well as the Confederate troops holding the back door on the Fredericksburg battlefield. It seems to me to be about the same as leaving Little Round Top off the Gettysburg 3 day scenario because the Confederates really don't have any hope of taking the hill against a decent Yank who will not overlook the need to defend the hill. Just have the Yankee 6th Corps fixed with some random release time to tie at least some of the Rebs in place. I really have not played the game yet because without all the entire map to use, I just have not found the interest yet to give it a try.
 

Hairog

adfads
Joined
May 16, 2006
Messages
54
Reaction score
1
Location
Wisconsin
Country
llUnited States
From what I'm finding I have to agree with your assessment. Too bad I was hoping to explore some real options here.

I've read a number of authors who have postulated that Lee was handed his butt to him strategically in both battles.

The usual "what if" are that at Fredericksburg the union pontoons were at the front of the army enabling them to get over the river and through town and set up a defensive position between Lee and Richmond days before Lee finally woke up.

And that at Chancellorsville again Lee was strategically behind the 8 ball but Hooker got put out of action for a few crucial hours by a near miss in some accounts and a screw up with his communications equipment probably sealed the deal.

Anyway I was hoping to play those "what ifs" and I am sorely disappointed in this supposed "campaign" so far.
 

Lord_Valentai

Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
514
Reaction score
0
Location
Sydney
Country
llAustralia
Having said this, Gettysburg is the only 'real' campaign that HPS has produced - in that it gives a large number of scenarios covering a large number of areas with many choices.

Peninsula comes close, but there the battle is of course concentrated on one large map.

I agree, I was disappointed with the lack of a wide ranging campaign.
 

krmiller_usa

Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2005
Messages
63
Reaction score
0
Location
McKeesport, Pa
There is a two day scenario covering the approach to Fredericksburg (002F), there is also a couple of one day scenarios (003F, 004F) covering what if the union had crossed the river before the pontoons arrived and the rebs weren't in force yet. I played one of those during the playtest and found it rather interesting although difficult for the rebs because of the total control the union player has. It's just not possible to duplicate the command screw ups that occurred on the union side in these two campaigns with the current command control structure in the game.
 
Joined
Nov 4, 2002
Messages
1,129
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
Country
llUnited States
Having said this, Gettysburg is the only 'real' campaign that HPS has produced - in that it gives a large number of scenarios covering a large number of areas with many choices.

Peninsula comes close, but there the battle is of course concentrated on one large map.

I agree, I was disappointed with the lack of a wide ranging campaign.
Play the single huge scenario covering the whole time period of the Seven Days and that is probably as close to a campaign as you'll find.
 

Hairog

adfads
Joined
May 16, 2006
Messages
54
Reaction score
1
Location
Wisconsin
Country
llUnited States
Thanks kmiller I'll give these scenarios a try. At least it's something.

So to get this straight there is only one real "campaign" in HPS Campaign series and that is Gettysburg?

If that is so thank you all for keeping me from (IMO) wasting my money and I am sorely disappointed.
 

Hannibal

Recruit
Joined
Aug 6, 2003
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
Location
Alabama
Can't Corinth and Shiloh be variable each time that you play them and thus fit a true campaign definition? I was also under the impression that Vicksburg has a little bit of variance to it but mainly dependent upon the Union's initial choice. I haven't played Chickamauga yet but is it the same scenarios each time that you play?
 

Lord_Valentai

Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
514
Reaction score
0
Location
Sydney
Country
llAustralia
Most of the HPS games allow you to fight a series of battles. Now, I've thought of another - Antietam. That is a good campaign, though there aren't many choices for each battle.

This is how I would rate them as far as both campaign width, interest and scope:

BEST - Gettysburg, HPS' best ACW game.
- Peninsula
- Antietam
- Atlanta
- Shiloh
- Chickamauga
- Vicksburg
- Ozark
WORST - Chancellorsville. Not much variation here, I'm afraid. Antietam and Gettysburg were great because they allowed the player to fight around Virginia and Maryland, which Chancellorsville sticks you on one map, yet with less variation than Peninsula.

Haven't played Corinth or Franklin.

This is not my critique on which game is best, just on my view of the campaign.
 

Rich Walker

Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2005
Messages
121
Reaction score
0
Location
Tennessee
Country
llUnited States
Thank you guys for your comments,

I hope to one day address some of your concerns, but at the moment, I have two projects going and limited time.

Chancellorsville was a difficult game to create a wide ranging campaign as it would tend to overlap other titles, i.e. Gettysburg or Antietam. And has been mentioned, linking Fredericksburg and Chancellorsville wasn't a good optrion as the time separation was too great, IMHO.

Though the campaign feature is limited in scope, there are many options and variations that should provide replayability. For myself, I prefer playing stand alone scenarios, and in that regard I feel there are many historical and nonhistorical scenarios to play.

But is won't be long before (perhaps a year or 18 months- I hope) the OOBs are unlocked and map editors become available to the public. This will allow energitic club members to tinker to their hearts content.
 

Hairog

adfads
Joined
May 16, 2006
Messages
54
Reaction score
1
Location
Wisconsin
Country
llUnited States
Sounds very cool. Thank you.

I guess my real concern is that it is being marketed as a "campaign" and it's not. It's a collection of very well thought out and designed scenarios which is fine but, it should not be sold as a "campaign".

The Gettysburg title is a true campaign and maybe in the future others will be too. You should not advertise "campaign" unless it is. A campaign IMHO is a series of choices by both sides that lead to different battles in different locations.

A suggestion for the for Fred and Chance might be to research all the historical figures options at the time. Could Pope have decided to go through Chance instead? If Burnside did not try Fred could Hooker later have tried there and had the pontoons in the proper position? Could the Union have tried Bull Run again with there new bigger army? You have the maps already done just replace the OOB.

According to Wiki

"Burnside, in response to prodding from Lincoln and General-in-Chief Maj. Gen. Henry W. Halleck, planned a late fall offensive; he communicated his plan to Halleck on November 9. The plan relied on quick movement and deceit. He would concentrate his army in a visible fashion near Warrenton, feigning a movement on Culpeper Court House, Orange Court House, or Gordonsville. Then he would rapidly shift his army southeast and cross the Rappahannock River to Fredericksburg, hoping that Robert E. Lee would sit still, unclear as to Burnside's intentions, while the Union Army made a rapid movement against Richmond, south along the Richmond, Fredericksburg, and Potomac Railroad from Fredericksburg. Burnside selected this plan because he was concerned that if he were to move directly south from Warrenton, he would be exposed to a flanking attack from Lt. Gen. Thomas J. "Stonewall" Jackson, whose corps was at that time in the Shenandoah Valley south of Winchester. He also believed that the Orange and Alexandria Railroad would be an inadequate supply line. While Burnside began assembling a supply base at Falmouth, near Fredericksburg, the Lincoln administration entertained a lengthy debate about the wisdom of his plan. Lincoln eventually approved but cautioned him to move with great speed, certainly doubting that Lee would cooperate as Burnside anticipated."

Here is another choice... Is this reflected in one of the scenarios?

"As Maj. Gen. Edwin Sumner arrived, he strongly urged an immediate crossing of the river to scatter the token Confederate force of 500 men in the town and occupying the commanding heights to the west. Burnside began to panic, worried that the increasing autumn rains would make the fording points unusable and that Sumner might be cut off and destroyed. He squandered his initiative and ordered Sumner to wait in Falmouth."

This one sounds cool too...

"The first pontoon bridges arrived at Falmouth on November 25, much too late to enable the Army of the Potomac to cross the river without opposition. Burnside still had an opportunity, however, because he was facing only half of Lee's army, not yet dug in, and if he acted quickly, he might be able to attack Longstreet and defeat him before Jackson arrived."

Is this one reflected by a scenario?

Could Burnside have seen the futility of Fred before he got too far committed and shifted to the Chance area?

But I guess that is what you are suggesting for what can happen after the OOBs and map editors are made public.
 

rahamy

HPS Games Forum Moderator
Joined
Jun 3, 2004
Messages
2,531
Reaction score
3
Location
Virginia, USA
Not so sure you'll see a map editor, but definitely the OOB's will be unlocked.
 

Lord_Valentai

Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
514
Reaction score
0
Location
Sydney
Country
llAustralia
That is fantastic news Rich!

I think that what other game companies making games of this type have found is that releasing them to modding is a good thing. I refer to the Total War and Europa Universalis series here. People will come back to keep buying your games despire the modding because A) Only you can make the core game changes, and B) You make the scenarios better than we can!

So I'm delighted by this news.
 
Top